The trial in The Hague of Kosovo’s former president, Hashim Thaçi, and his co-defendants has sparked political debate in Kosovo. Recent initiatives to involve state institutions in their defense have deepened disagreements: while some politicians are calling for greater institutional support, Belgian-based lawyer Skënder Musliu warns of possible legal and diplomatic consequences.
Të lidhura
None found
Speaking to “Bota sot,” Musliu rejects comparisons between Thaçi’s case and that of Croatian general Ante Gotovina. According to him, the proceedings differ from one another, and the support Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina provided to their generals and commanders cannot serve as a model for Kosovo.
Musliu argues that the generals and commanders of Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina fought in battles and on the front line against Serbia’s army, paramilitary forces and special police forces to protect civilians and liberate their countries. Unlike them, he says, the four defendants themselves stated that they did not participate in the war and did not fight against the Serbian army; the charges against them concern war crimes against the civilian population.
The lawyer insists that the responsibility of the accused individuals must be separated from that of an organization. He says that the Kosovo Liberation Army is neither being tried nor defended in The Hague, but rather specific individuals. For this reason, in his view, the cases of Croatian and Bosniak generals and commanders do not justify a similar institutional strategy in Kosovo.
Musliu’s criticism includes recent decisions to supplement and amend the Law on Specialist Chambers and the Specialist Prosecutor’s Office, as well as initiatives for an institutional approach to the defense of the accused on appeal. He considers the involvement of Kosovo’s institutions in the Hague process a rash and dangerous step, both domestically and internationally.
According to the lawyer, if Kosovo exercises jurisdiction over these Chambers, the institutions’ intervention in the proceedings could be viewed by the international community as interference in the administration of justice. He warns that such actions could make Kosovo’s relations with its international partners more difficult.
Musliu distinguishes between intervention in the proceedings and funding legal defense. He says the Government of Kosovo has regularly paid the defendants’ lawyers, spending millions, and that this assistance should continue in accordance with the law. However, he calls on institutions to act with discretion, without undermining the independence of the proceedings or relations with strategic partners.
The lawyer also expresses concern about the criticism that, according to him, Kosovo’s institutions are receiving from the European Union. In this regard, he emphasizes the need to respect international obligations and the commitments Kosovo has made to its European partners.
At the conclusion of his remarks to “Bota sot,” Musliu raises the issue of political responsibility if the accused are found guilty in a final judgment, after appeals have been completed at all levels of the courts. He asks how the institutions would then justify financing and supporting them through a state strategy, as well as what they would tell the relatives of victims and people who experienced violence in makeshift prisons.
